The first CA failed in this task in the four years of its existence. The major issues that led to its failure remain unresolved and there is certainly no guarantee that the new CA will be able to come up with a decisive solution. The failure of the first CA clearly reflects the incompetence and unwillingness of the major parties to arrive at a compromise, a major element of a successful democratic system.[break]
Republica
Institutional vacuum
At present the country does not have a legitimate democratic institution where people’s representatives can gather and discuss the problems facing the nation. When a country does not have political institutions that derive their legitimacy from the people to deliberate on the affairs of the state, there remains a serious danger of social and political turmoil leading to anarchy and violence. Political institutions that derive legitimacy from the people provide the forum to define a road map to the future. At present the main cause of worry is that we lack such a forum.
Before the dissolution of the first CA we at least had a legitimate institution that had the people’s mandate to oversee the affairs of the state, warn the government and put pressure on it for course correction. We do not have that institution anymore and the forthcoming election at least assures us that there will be a legitimate parliament, one which can hopefully form a government and work towards a new constitution. From a national perspective this is the main reason why we need an election in November.
Increasing apprehension
How serious are we in our commitment to election in November? This is a question that is now being raised, notwithstanding most political parties’ avowed commitment to polls in November. Election related issues that were settled some weeks ago among the big parties are again being debated. In the meantime the CPN-Maoist is coming up with various preconditions to even start negotiations to take part in the forthcoming election. There is an increasing apprehension that all this noise about the new election among the so-called big political parties is in fact just a ruse for another political game of deceit and deception being enacted to come to power once the Khil Raj Regmi government is unable to fulfill its mandate in November.
The Baidya Maoist has been against the election right from the day it was announced. Interestingly, one reason for their opposition is based on the logic that the appointment of Regmi as the head of the government is against the basic democratic principle of separation of power. It is hard to disagree, even though this sudden love for bourgeois democratic norms in the Maoist party that basically believes in a one party state smacks of a certain degree of political opportunism. However, this is not surprising since it has been the characteristic of all parties in Nepal that claim their ancestry to revolutionary politics.
Nevertheless, Baidya’s logic deserves serious consideration. The amendment of the constitution stating that only the sitting chief justice of the country would be eligible to head the election government—as if there was no one else who could discharge this responsibility in an impartial manner—was proposed by Prachanda-led UCPN (Maoist) and accepted by other parties—the Nepali Congress and CPN-UML. Both the NC and UML agreed with Prachanda’s idea that challenged the most important directive principles of the constitution on the ground that they were forced into it and there was no other option.
Who forced them to go against their political conviction remains unexplained. In the meantime Regmi continues to remain the head of all three organs of the state, the judiciary, the executive and the legislative. This is against the basic political values outlined in the constitution. Therefore it would be good sense on the part of Regmi to resign from the post of chief justice to show his commitment to the principle of separation of power. This is all the more important now since the country does not have a legislature that can perform the oversight function. If Regmi finds this option unpalatable the least he can do is declare that once the electoral process is complete he will not go back to the Supreme Court, implying his commitment to keeping the judiciary independent.
Four-party syndicate
The other point of concern is the so-called “syndicate” of the four parties formed to guide the Regmi government. It is an unconstitutional mechanism that has been primarily busy in putting pressure on Regmi to appoint its sympathizers or even cadres to important positions in the government including the judiciary. It is indicative of a mindset determined to remind the government that it exists at the mercy of the four parties and should therefore function as its adjustable instrument.
In fact a senior leader of UCPN (Maoist) has publicly stated that the government might be headed by Khil Raj Regmi, but the key to its functioning lies with the four parties that helped to put it on show. This attitude of overshadowing the government, and projecting the impression that the four-party syndicate is capable of doing whatever it wishes has been a source of public resentment. The CPN-Maoist and other political parties have sensed the opportunity and are demanding that the four-party syndicate that at times acts as if it is above the constitution be formally dissolved.
The dissolution of the four-party syndicate and a declaration by Regmi that he is not going back to the court after the election will go a long way in strengthening the hands of the government to hold the election on time. Even the hardcore Maoists under Baidya have not rejected the idea of election to the CA. Some of the points they have raised are valid and it would make sense for other parties to find a way out so that all stakeholders feel comfortable going to the polls.
The writer is a leader of the Rastriya Prajatantra Party
Related story
Vote count resumes after 4 hours in Dharan Sub-metropolitan Cit...
_20240311121839.jpg)
